Wednesday, March 5, 2008

If we went private, there would be no reason to exist...

Urban Myths blog is a fun, fascinating place. As I have been reading through the comments on each of the blogs, something comes to mind. This blog fills a very specific void. That void is in “Keithworld”, and it is all about searching for answers when questions are asked. We aren't experts on all things Keith Urban and we don't claim to be. We have simply taken some of the crap spewed around the topic and tried to make sense of it. Someone recently said to me that the blog picks apart the myths without creating new ones. I like that, but it I think that misses something. We don't have that power. No one really does unless you are Keith Urban and Nicole Kidman; we can only see how they have sold their lives to the media, and the fact that they have no interest in using the power of the truth. So, those few who care, and yes, dear readers, we do care about Keith Urban; as much as we don't understand him, we are left trying to make sense of it all.

Why do they keep lying about all kinds of things? Why do some parties of the media give Kidman a free pass? Why does Keith look so lost? Why does Kidman continue to play this media game? Many of us started out being fans of Keith. We went to the shows. We traveled all over. We felt a part of things; his success was because of his talent, but also because of us. We had a stake in the career.

Then comes Kidman and Keith becomes Keith Kidman. Fame becomes the new goal. The sideshow overtook the career. Maybe that is exactly what Keith Urban wanted, but if that is so, why does he look so forlorn?

Why not leave? Because there is an investment in him. Not just money or time, but a lot of people actually cared. No, not a fantasy land with fake children and hot wild sex every night and he was going to drive up on the Harley and take us away. Nope, there was a sincere sense that was a mutual caring about him from the fans, and that came back to the fans from him. People on all the fan sites feel that. Skeptics think it is lost, others don't.

Why not go private? Because that would not serve the purpose of the blog as a place where people can read an opinion, give their own back, and let others decide for themselves. Who knows, we might just find the truth. But even if the truth will never be known, it helps everyone to simply talk.

66 comments:

White Trash said...

"Why not go private? Because that would not serve the purpose of the blog as a place where people can read an opinion, give their own back, and let others decide for themselves. Who knows, we might just find the truth. But even if the truth will never be known, it helps everyone to simply talk."

As much as I disagree with a lot of what this blogger has to say, I whole heartedly agree. For the most part, it has been a good place to banter amonst the skeptics, bunnies and "tweeners".

maclen said...

Very interesting blog Urban Myths. I've always found your blog to be a great place to rant my own thoughts and opinions, more so of kidman's disingenous and patently phoney image... my personal pet peeve... but also try to add my own perspective on what effect it has on urban's career, from a point of view of an outsider.. and I am... So, hopefully the comments can get back to addressing any effects that may... or may not be hurting...or helping urbans career... and the silly and constantly trying to out insult other commenters... will cease to distract from the main point of your blog.

Cindy said...

Oh good God, are you bloggers EVER going to get over your celebrity worship and start doing something CONSTRUCTIVE with your lives?

These celebrities do not care what you write about them -- they laugh at your weirdness as we all do..LOL!

banbotox said...

I agree maclen...we need this board to just vent out how frustrating it is to now watch the circus that has been Keith's public life. It has been interesting to read the opposing point of view-I don't agree with it at all but I wouldn't want that to stop-just the name calling and the assumptions, Geez already...

And I so agree UM..so many questions, so very few "truths."

banbotox said...

cindy said: Oh good God, are you bloggers EVER going to get over your celebrity worship and start doing something CONSTRUCTIVE with your lives?

These celebrities do not care what you write about them -- they laugh at your weirdness as we all do..LOL!


Then why are you here cindy?

maclen said...

banbotox said...
"Then why are you here cindy?"

Here we have another example banbotox, as you know, I always get a kick out of the clueless ones, who attempt ridicule, snideness, etc... trying to convey a point that those who participate in a comment blog are just losers, or in this case, "weird" because they comment on a commment blog.... by commenting on a comment blog! Are they really that clueless and thick?
Urban would do himself a huge service by maybe considering listening to those voices who are not paid yes men or women... who are more prone to cultivating or continuing an air of denial, and a false sense of career stability, despite the reality of falling cd sales...and touring success. Again, I just think urban is being very short-sighted, and certainly not clear sighted.

doublewide said...

very good blog....portrays alot of the feelings i have/had for the man....

i agree, maclen, maybe keith should listen to others beyond the yes men and women

doublewide said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
biteme said...

Thank goodness for this blog. I finally found a place that you are allowed to express your feelings, opinions and/or views either positive or negative. Also I found a place with people who feel the same way as I do.

On the official worship website, if you post any sort of discussion that is not shiny and happy, you will be banned and your post delete.

Most of the people on this site see Keith in their own light and not the light that the paid people want you to see him.

doublewide said...

i agree biteme....this is a great blog...seems very tolerant of all opinions. that worship site is just that.....unwavering adoration and worship...zero tolerance for anything that hints at being negative or puts the Queen in a questionable light.

realitycheck said...

Well Umyths and other skeptics, it seems the proof is finally here. Pics of Nicole's real baby bump have surfaced.

And yes i said real. Imagine that!

http://tinyurl.com/38csx4

Before anybody complains that this was a planned photo-op, whether it is or isnt, is not the issue. Because finally this ridiculous notion of a fake pregnancy or surrogate pregnancy can be laid to rest.

Not exactly the photos you guys wanted to see I'm sure, but there they are nonetheless.

Sonora_Melody said...

RC, thanks for that url. It looks like they had to stop so that her heart rate monitor can be readjusted. Ah! So much for the "skeptics" with "fake concerns" that she might be "overheating her body". It looks like she and her personal trainer are being very cautious by having her heart rate monitored.

Fake pregnancy? Her close pal Naomi Watts just met with her recently and had this to say:

"While Schreiber has been busy filming Hugh Jackman's blockbuster Wolverine, Watts has indulged in baby talk with Kidman.

'I am very happy for her (Kidman). You miss each other and there is so much to catch up on that you can never do it in one sitting,' Watts smiled.

'She seems to be enjoying pregnancy a lot. She's in the States now so I am looking forward to hanging out with her more when she gets back,' a clucky Watts said." http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/story/0,26278,23327809-10388,00.html

I'm sure Naomi knows a thing or two about real pregnancy. And she believes and knows her pal IS pregnant!

don't believe the lies said...

Eh I'm still not convinced. Looks like maybe she actually just ate something. I still question her past history and all the excersising she's doing. It just doesn't make sense.

Urban Myths said...

Hmmmmm. From that website, when you open the pics, click on "previous image" until you hit the one of her in the pink dress with Hugh Jackman on the set of Australia. She had as much of a bump back then.

notachance said...

While those are clearly bump shots, by the size of it I would say she was only 3-4 months along - not the 5 she's saying. That's gonna be one TINY baby if you ask me.

Why does she need to be in training for a marathon? For once sit back and relax and enjoy this time in your life Nicole. I almost believe she doesn't know how to actually sit back & relax outside of work - something Keith struggled desperately with, that ultimately landed him in rehab for 90 days. Ironic, eh?

Sometimes my ugly skeptic head just can't help popping up.

Berry Hill said...

I think the pictures are suspect- on many levels.

White Trash said...

OH MY GOD, you skeptics are so desperate for Nicole's pregnancy to not be true you'll grasp at anything to make it not so. Clearly, she's pregnant and that's exactly how big I looked at 4-5 months. I didn't really start popping out until after 6 months.

People are different, pregnancies are different so don't assume because your pregnancy wasn't like that or you've seen others that weren't that small - Pregnant women are not the same - PERIOD!

And I'm just waiting for one of you skeptics to suggest she was wearing a pregnancy prosthetic! GEEZ!!

doublewide said...

talk about PIMPING THE BUMP....ewwwww how staged are these pics? i don't really care all that much if she is pregnant or there is a surrogate. if keith is the father, he's screwed either way.

even if she is pregnant and is having this baby (that she has so desperately wanted forever and ever)..yeah right....it still doesn't help her failing career.

i think lainey predicted we'd have belly pics within the week, and the famewhore did not disappoint. she is truly revolting.

wonder which one of her peeps is reading this blog??? he he

ConfusedAndDeeplyTroubled said...

Rotflmao and shaking my head.

Oh so you know, I DO find you..errr..ladies(?) fascinating.

Keep up the good work...God knows we need all the help we can get to fight the grave injustice of a celebrity living a life contrary to what his fans want him to live. I mean…the nerve!!!

maclen said...

doublewide said...
"talk about PIMPING THE BUMP....ewwwww how staged are these pics? i don't really care all that much if she is pregnant or there is a surrogate. if keith is the father, he's screwed either way."

Well, you're certainly right about that doublewide. If kidman truly believes this is going to "endear" her to the movie going public, she is so far gone from where even I thought. These photo ops are as blatantly exploitative and as repulsive as the spears, lohan, et al flashing and exposing their vaginas to the paparatz.... its tabloid porn... and it certainly lowers her to the level of those pubicity mongering trainwrecks. But then I did predict she would high tail it back to Oz and continue the shameless photo ops... as urban remained in the states and the tour she will never, ever see in person... Only I never saw it as these fanatical work out pics that are certainly not putting her in the best light... but then on the other hand, I am not surprised as we are talking about team kidman, the pr geniuses who cant seem to shoot straight or get anything right.

maclen said...

...A correction... continue the photo ops in LA.... I guess cruise's kids are no longer available for her photo ops... and with urban on tour, that leaves her with the only thing she loves most... herself...

doublewide said...

...A correction... continue the photo ops in LA.... I guess cruise's kids are no longer available for her photo ops... and with urban on tour, that leaves her with the only thing she loves most... herself...

truer word never spoken, maclen. i agree, this is horrible behavior and team kidman just gets DUMBER and DUMBER.....to think people don't see thru this spectacle is ridiculous.

Berry Hill said...

Lainey's column today-- she says photgraphers still don't think she's pregnant either:

http://www.laineygossip.com/Nicole_Kidman_tries_to_convince_everyone_shes_pregnant.aspx

The Predictable Granny Freeze

Remember these photos from the other day? Flynet catching Granny Freeze looking ancient with a receding hairline and a little bump? Remember the rumour about the bump?

Hate to gloat but I said at the time – she’d find a way to “prove” her pregnancy.

And indeed she did!

Nicole working out and exposing her belly making sure you can see that she does indeed have a bulge. Click here for the pics.

Coincidence… or conspiracy?

FYI – the photogs just think she gained some weight. They’re not convinced she’s carrying either. Hee.

realitycheck said...

The knee-jerk reaction here is so predictable. You say she's not pregnant. There's visual proof to the contrary and look at the responses! This illustrates exactly what I'm talking about. Its obvious many here arent interested in the truth. They just want to rip apart Nicole every chance they get. The skepticism is getting to a point where its laughable. When there's footage of a real live baby you'll say Nicole paid someone off at Industrial Light and Magic.

white_trash, thank you for having the good sense to see she is in fact pregnant. The prosthetic rumor has already been bandied about. That she was using padding from either the Desperate Housewives set or from The Reader, the movie she dropped out of. Both rumors gave me a nice little chuckle. People will make up anything in an attempt to deny something they dont want to believe.

And for those of you that believe she's pregnant but are so upset about Nicole "pimping" her baby I dont believe it for once second. You just want to complain there are pics. Cheese with that whine?

Urban Myths said...

Here's an example of an unarranged photoshoot with the paps. Isn't she loverly?

http://x17online.com/celebrities/nicole_kidman/nicoles_new_wardrobe-03062008.php

notachance said...

Ok UM - you get the prize today for the fugly pic. But doesn't this kinda prove that she is prego? There's no botox in use on that face. And we all know if she could - she would.

maclen said...

Urban Myths, it truly appears these photo ops, each one more hideous than the last, are conclusive proof that kidman is offically finished as a viable movie star. As surely her days of being the highest paid actress is over due to her films failing at the box office... the reality is she should only be lucky to get the occasional character actor bit parts, which really all along, she was barely talented for. And those photos of her shopping for new clothes? Id swear those are the exact photos used when she was out shopping with the sis and her kid, and kidman was, as doublewide says, pimping out her sis's kid... only instead of holding a kid, now, she's expecting everyone to believe she has a "Baby on Board"... so obviously she doesnt need the sis's kid. The only question remaining, will she ever see her sister's kid again?

doublewide said...

Ok UM - you get the prize today for the fugly pic. But doesn't this kinda prove that she is prego? There's no botox in use on that face. And we all know if she could - she would.

----------------------------------

i'm inclined to agree here, but she is so calculating, maybe she's laying off the botox to prove she's got as maclen put it a "baby on board". (when she really doesn't)

i am inclined to believe she is pregnant.....but some of the pics and bumps just don't add up.

notachance said...

Sorry, I can't see NK giving up the juice as a means of covering up a "clever deceit" of a false pregnancy.

What I want to know is - how does she keep that massive forehead in check at an event these days? Are they slathering on the makeup so much that we can't tell anymore? Because she wasn't that crinkley at the Oscars.

doublewide said...

yeah, notachance, her forehead did look pretty smoothe at the Oscars.....

but i do know that she had that trainer put on that monitor OUT IN THE OPEN just for show.....not too desperate, eh?

maclen said...

The fact is doublewide, commenters on here who clearly are not impressed by her, will never give her an inch... just as her admirers will always take a foot, and will completely defend her... as for the ones who one day say "shes Alright"...then "she's not alright"... well, vacillate away. I always said I believed she couldnt concieve, or if she did, she was unable to carry to term, but was always suspect of her claims that she became pregnant and lost the baby back in 2001. Coming as it did after the fact that cruise filed for divorce, and was not willing to stay and work it out with kidman, to me made it look like a very fake and cheap ploy on kidmans part to get cruise to reconsider... why else would she include it in the divorce papers? Why make it public, when she then revealed only last year in the Vanity fair piece, that she had also lost a kid early in the marriage to cruise, 17 long years before? It all just looks like calculated publicity opportunism. So, in my opinion today, if kidman has a kid now, under the most outlandish stunts of physical exersion for a person who has supposedly claimed a past history of trouble in delivering... well that simply strengthens my belief that those past claims were actually bogus, and she is now just trying to have a kid to try and save her failed movie career... as publicity opportunism.

doublewide said...

yep, maclen, i was never impressed with her before keith and my opinion has surely not altered one bit.

celebrities with such a strong sense of "entitlement" are a real turn off, as if her acting isn't enough of one!

and i have always thought those past claims of hers were bogus. she was just playing tom and the public.

realitycheck said...

maclen, she included it in the papers to prove that they were still being intimate. Tom pulled the rug out form under her. I have no doubt that him leaving was a shock to Nicole. Eevn if she did not want to reveal the lost pregnancy, I'm sure the lawyers wanted to include it.

The Co$ told Cruise to dump Kidman because she wasnt helping their agenda. When the Co$ talks Cruise does what he's told like a good little boy.

Sonora_Melody said...

"doublewide said...
But doesn't this kinda prove that she is prego? There's no botox in use on that face. And we all know if she could - she would."

Ahh!!! What a dilemna for the skeptics as to which version of their fantasies and lies to stick to!

doublewide said...

i didn't say that SONORA......notachance did, but i tend to agree

getaholdofurself said...

i've worked with women who didn't develop a noticeable belly until the sixth month. i worked with one, in fact, who was hired in her fourth month and no one realized she was pregnant until her seventh when she seemed to balloon over night.

as for exercise, while a woman shouldn't take up running if she did nothing but sit on the couch prior to becoming pregnant, exercise is good for both mother and baby according to my OB/GYN.

realitycheck said...

I may have said this before but Antonia, Nic's sister, didnt really start showing until the sixth month. Thats a better indicator than comparing NK to other pregnant celebrities.

banbotox said...

All I have to say is remember this one? Compare with the newest x17 "bump" shot...looks the same to me.

http://tinyurl.com/245p6d

BTW-there are more from St. Barts that are more detailed.

White Trash said...

"Urban Myths, it truly appears these photo ops, each one more hideous than the last, are conclusive proof that kidman is offically finished as a viable movie star"

Have you not seen actresses without their makeup? I agree those pictures her looking haggard, but I've seen worse.

Urban Myths said...

realitycheck said:
I may have said this before but Antonia, Nic's sister, didnt really start showing until the sixth month.

And you know this how? Are you a member of the Kidman family?

maclen said...

doublewide said...
"but i do know that she had that trainer put on that monitor OUT IN THE OPEN just for show.....not too desperate, eh?"

You know doublewide, I almost overlooked this little tidbit... and it just struck me as hilarious... yes, even outlandish. And I did look back at all the photos at the original link, and your right, its obvious the trainer is monitoring something to do with her "bump", hence she is raising her shirt...so is it probable that kidman went out and actually found a bodyguard/trainer/obstetrician/gynecologist...
who is in the habit of doing this type of exam right in the middle of the road? And it also makes me wonder, when a gynecological exam is required... will they simply slip into the wooded surroundings to administer that? And will a hired paparat take care of that photo op?

Urban Myths said...

Hahahaha! Maclen, perfect!

bringbackkeithurban said...

Once again, the UM blog is right on the money! Thanks for constantly giving us "skeptics" a place to see truth. Well, the "truth" as much as the Kidman's will allow. (I mean, after all, they are living their lives quietly and out of the spotlight!)

I really wonder if Keith Urban is satisfied with the way his career is going. Who would have thought- just a few short years ago-he would be where he is now? I bet Brad Paisley, Rodney Atkins, and others are really happy about the marriage to the Beautiful, Beautiful Princess. What a waste of a lot of talent. Hey, he could always give lessons...on how to carry water, how to protect from those evil photogs. and, most importantly, how to not be scared crapless at the sight of your wife in the morning!

doublewide said...

maclen, that's hysterical! lol

Sonora_Melody said...

"bringbackkeithurban said...
Thanks for constantly giving us "skeptics" a place to see truth. "

Well... here's a piece of truth for you. Shaye and Lynne deserve to be booted out by Time Warner! Don't blame anyone else for the mess they created at New Line Cinema. Here's a well-written article by one of the well-respected Hollywood columnists:

"Warners eats New Line
Risk-taking subsid never easy fit with studio
By ANNE THOMPSON

Indie maverick Bob Shaye never fit comfortably inside the Warner House. No matter how much Shaye played the Hollywood movie mogul, with his lavish parties and vacation cruises, there was still something of the '70s ragtag rebel about him.
The Lower East Side company he founded in 1967 thrived on B-pics like "Reefer Madness," John Waters' "Pink Flamingos" and "Polyester," and such franchises as the "Nightmare on Elm Street" series and "The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles."

"They were the first ones to mix art and exploitation," says Waters, "which is where I was coming from. They had huge art hits, commercial hits, and invented genres."

Always a showman, Shaye never stopped flying by the seat of his pants.

And for 40 years, that kept New Line Cinema kicking. The company was never safe, exactly. But even when he had no money, Shaye would always pull something out of his hat. He became a multi-millionaire when he sold New Line to Ted Turner in 1994, and when Turner's holdings were folded into Time Warner in 1996, some observers suggested New Line was a superfluous addition to the big studio.

From the start, Shaye's relationship with the parent studio was contentious and competitive. New Line was never absorbed into the larger Warners corporate culture. But Shaye survived, longer than any other studio head, by always coming up with a smash when he needed one. Over the decades, the company lived off a series of genre franchises that kept on giving, from "Critters" and "Friday" to "Blade" and "Rush Hour."

Until, after a three-year cold stretch, Shaye's luck finally ran out.

"New Line was a place you could go to bungee jump," says producer Don Murphy. "It was a lot of fun, an amazing place. But after a number of bungee jumps, eventually the cord breaks."

At the behest of Time Warner topper Jeff Bewkes, Warners is ingesting the studio as a smaller genre label, and will distribute such upcoming pics as "Sex and the City: The Movie" worldwide. Sounding very much the dispassionate bureaucrat, Bewkes stressed "the importance of coordinated strategy for international and digital distribution of filmed entertainment, and the need to continue to make sure that we're running our businesses as efficiently as possible."

Shaye and his 17-year New York partner, co-chairman Michael Lynne, are gone.

Now Warners execs Alan Horn and Jeff Robinov are figuring out who will stay and who will go, and what the final size and shape of the shrunken New Line will be. Production chief Toby Emmerich is expected to stay on for the initial transition.

New Line specialty label Picturehouse, led by prexy Bob Berney, is likely to merge with the floundering Warner Independent Pictures. As Warners scopes out New Line's projects and development, many producers who don't fit into the genre-label Dimension-style mold hope to escape turnaround by moving their scripts over to big Warners.

The parallels with the Weinstein's Miramax Films and parent Disney are unavoidable. Both companies were about the same size, 600 employees on both coasts. Both were run by a pair of mavericks who ran afoul, after Oscar-winning blockbusters, of a big conglomerate's needs for predictability and control over its subsidiary's spending. Both had trouble getting along inside the corporate culture. "You're seeing the dethronement of personality in favor of low-cost, low-risk, lower-exposure, controllable people," says one ex-Miramax staffer.

There was always an aura of the dysfunctional family around New Line.

The nurturing mom was 10-year production chief Sara Risher, who moved the company into its current home on Robertson Blvd. in 1988 with four people. She stayed on with a production deal after 1995, when she was succeeded by her one-time intern Michael DeLuca, Shaye's surrogate son. "New Line was special in this corporate world," says Risher, "because it still felt family-owned and run."

Over the next 10 years, New Line made serious dough on genre pictures such as "Mortal Kombat," as well as David Fincher's "Seven," and the "Austin Powers" series, which helped to pay for a smattering of artier pics like Paul Thomas Anderson's "Boogie Nights" and "Magnolia."

But while the distrib survived on bread-and-butter niches like horror, action, comedy and urban pics, New Line often fell down in the realm of higher-budget pictures, losing big bucks on such risky bets as Renny Harlin's "Long Kiss Goodnight," "The Astronaut's Wife" starring Johnny Depp and Charlize Theron, and "Last Man Standing" starring Bruce Willis.

In 2001, after enduring the big-budget disaster "Town and Country," industry observers speculated that Peter Jackson's three-part adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" would finally bring down the company. But the biggest gamble of Shaye's career -- which scored $2.9 billion worldwide -- gave new life to Shaye and Lynne's autonomous run.

New Line never quite got back on track after the 2003 departure of DeLuca, Shaye's brilliant alter ego and often bad boy, who finally acted out too much to be allowed to stay on. But talent loved him. And he knew how to make movies.

Emmerich was solidified as DeLuca's successor with two smash comedies, Jon Favreau's "Elf" in 2004 followed by 2005's "Wedding Crashers," starring Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson. But the company's comedies were more the purview of rising exec Richard Brener. While more mature and grounded than the unformed DeLuca, affable music maven and screenwriter Emmerich never quite commanded his predecessor's level of respect inside the film community.

"He was the one who was pushing away from the brand," says one former New Line exec. "He went away from horror."

In 2005, Shaye spent six weeks in a coma, fighting a near-fatal staph infection.When he recovered, he returned feistier than ever. But instead of attending to his company slate, he immediately directed "The Last Mimzy." With New Line's leader sidelined, 2006 saw such duds as the $33 million "Snakes on a Plane" and the Jack Black comedy "Tenacious D: 'The Pick of Destiny." And "The Last Mimzy" was no help to the company's 2007 bottom line.

There was often, over the years, a disconnect between production and marketing at New Line. While producers Albert Berger and Ron Yerxa praise the studio for greenlighting Todd Field's "Little Children" and "taking chances all over the place," they found less support in the marketing arena.

On the other hand, Shaye and Lynne were heavily invested in the 2007 hit "Hairspray," based on New Line's Broadway musical of the 1988 Waters film. "We could not have had a better experience with a studio," says producer Craig Zadan. "They let us do everything we wanted to do, from production through marketing."

Truth is, Warners and New Line never got along. Shaye never played well with others inside the corporate sandbox. They squabbled over release dates, hot auction scripts, even DC comics. Another source of friction with Warners was New Line's insistence, with international head Rolf Mittweg, on hanging onto the old-fashioned distribution paradigm of hedging downside risk (and upside gains) by pre-selling foreign territories on their films. While the upfront guarantees would help them fund their slate, the returns on a hit were always slow in coming. It did not please Time Warner to see foreign distribs getting rich off "LOTR."

New Line's best hope for a last-ditch reprieve -- as pressure from Time Warner increased -- was dashed when yet another all-out bet, on the $180 million would-be franchise "The Golden Compass," disappointed domestically -- and kicked ass overseas. Bewkes won't let that money walk out the door again.

Shaye and Lynne might have pulled off another win-win if Shaye hadn't wasted years publicly wrangling with various talent connected with "Lord of the Rings" over who would get what share of the loot. Only recently did New Line finally come to terms with filmmaker Peter Jackson so that New Line's most valuable asset, Tolkien's "The Hobbit" prequel, could proceed with him as producer.

Mark Ordesky, the New Line exec who worked closely with Jackson's camp on "LOTR" and developed "The Golden Compass" and the upcoming "Inkheart," is expected to continue to supervise "The Hobbit," possibly with "Pan's Labyrinth" director Guillermo del Toro on board to helm.

At September's Lincoln Center New York Film Festival tribute celebrating New Line's 40th anniversary, complete with clip reels and a roster of stars including Morgan Freeman, Jane Fonda, Nicole Kidman and of course, New Line icon Waters giving testimonials, more than one attendee felt the evening was less than a gala. It was a wake.

"I feel like an orphan," Waters says."

maclen said...

Hey bringbackkeithurban, welcome to the jungle! Nice insights...
Yes Urban Myths, doublewide and bringbackkeithurban, we have surely entered a prime time... a "Golden Age", if you will...(minus the compass of course)... of the disintegation of not just her face, but of her "public personae". Her standing seems to be falling faster than box office receipts of "Cold and comb pass" did... which could also refer to her recent "comb over" of her seemingly faster falling hair... Is there anything she can actually do now that is not already ready made to reveal the shallowness of her feeble and inner core? Is it really to the point where a simple scratching of her surface is more than enough to show the hollow and decrepit state?

Sonora_Melody said...

Maclen: say what you want about The Golden Compass. According to Variety, it kicked ass overseas. The worldwide boxoffice is now at US$340 Million! Thank you very much!

bringbackkeithurban said...

Sonora_Melody-Glad to know the latest flop did well overseas. I, for one, would be oh-so-happy if NK would cut ALL ties with the US (especially her husband) and stay overseas. If THEY love her, THEY can have her. I was never a fan (even when she first started out), and the last few years have not improved my original feelings on her.

Ha, Maclen on your name for the latest in a long list of "great" movies.

Urban Myths said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sonora_Melody said...

"I, for one, would be oh-so-happy if NK would cut ALL ties with the US (especially her husband)"

Keep dreaming!

Urban Myths said...

Dearest Sonora, take a look at this article. It's quite lengthy, but I'll be POLITE and just post the link, rather than taking up room on the blog ;-)

http://tinyurl.com/23xtwl

realitycheck said...

realitycheck said:
I may have said this before but Antonia, Nic's sister, didnt really start showing until the sixth month.

And you know this how? Are you a member of the Kidman family?

-------

Are you joking? Antonia is a tv presenter over in Australia. She is famous too and has her pic taken by the paps. In fact she hosted a show about pregnancy called From Here To Maternity.


sonora, thanks for that very informative article on New Line.



urban_myths, why would you post a link to an article that contains this statement...

"At the core of any discussion about the sour turn in Nicole Kidman's film career is the need to remind ourselves that she is a genuinely talented and gifted" actress.

Did you hope that because it was stuck there in the middle we would miss it? Isnt that statement antithetical to this blog's opinion of her acting? And i would like to know how the author knows no women like her. Her core fan base is women.

She gives 150% in her performance no matter how much the other elements of the film are lacking. Critics forget that film is not an actors medium. At best its a directors/editors medium and at worst it a studios medium. Nicole Kidman only has control over her performance and in a sense that is limited to on the day of filming. The director chooses which takes to use. The editor can edit a film into something completely different than what the actors anticipated. The studio can force changes that are detrimental. The director may have made creative decisions that were mistakes...as Frank Oz admits about "The Stepford Wives". But time and time again Nicole delivers riveting performaces and thats why I am fan and will continue to be. And i am a woman.

inittowinit said...

reality check said...

Nicole Kidman only has control over her performance and in a sense that is limited to on the day of filming.
-----------------------------------
OK - so maybe she was on drugs the day of the performance? Maybe she has no self-control? Maybe she's in a bad mood? Maybe she's ill? I prefer to think she's just a BAD actress!

Give us all your editing/directing
mumbo jumbo all you want - the ONLY reason Nicole Kidman ever was granted so many movies was because she married a short little presumably gay powerful man years ago. It has had NOTHING to do with talent!

getaholdofurself said...

Urban Myths said...
Dearest Sonora, take a look at this article. It's quite lengthy, but I'll be POLITE and just post the link, rather than taking up room on the blog ;-)

http://tinyurl.com/23xtwl

-------------------------

LOL! i don't remember you calling out berry hill for taking up space several blogs back.

doublewide said...

Hey bringbackkeithurban, welcome to the jungle! Nice insights...
Yes Urban Myths, doublewide and bringbackkeithurban, we have surely entered a prime time... a "Golden Age", if you will...(minus the compass of course)... of the disintegation of not just her face, but of her "public personae". Her standing seems to be falling faster than box office receipts of "Cold and comb pass" did... which could also refer to her recent "comb over" of her seemingly faster falling hair... Is there anything she can actually do now that is not already ready made to reveal the shallowness of her feeble and inner core? Is it really to the point where a simple scratching of her surface is more than enough to show the hollow and decrepit state?

well, maclen, i don't think there is much more she can do. Lifting that shirt and showing that belly in front of the whole world just smacks of desperation and hopelessness. and then those heinous shopping pics come out! if she's trying to hold onto her youth and her relevance that sure didn't help her cause. THAT didn't look like a planned photo op, but then again when you're dealing with "desperateness" (is that a word?) who knows?

Sonora_Melody said...

"inittowinit said...
OK - so maybe she was on drugs the day of the performance? Maybe she has no self-control? Maybe she's in a bad mood? Maybe she's ill? I prefer to think she's just a BAD actress!"

Have you forgotten the director can simply yell CUT and reshoot the scenes over (and over) until he's satisfied with the scene? Have you also forgotten the film editor and director can edit her scenes out?

---------------------------------
"inittowinit said...
Give us all your editing/directing
mumbo jumbo all you want - the ONLY reason Nicole Kidman ever was granted so many movies was because she married a short little presumably gay powerful man years ago. It has had NOTHING to do with talent!"

The "short little man" is not even "powerful" enough to get "himself" movie deals that can earn him an Oscar or Golden Globe award, which he desperately wanted. Shall we start naming a few of his boxoffice flops:
- Lions for Lambs bombed in the boxoffice and was critically panned as well.
- Mission Impossible III, Collateral, Vanilla Sky came in way UNDER projections.

Mr. "Powerful" could not even save his own movie deals when Viacom Chief Sumner Redstone severed ties with his production company in 2006. And YOU want us to believe he helped get movie deals for Nicole? LMAO ... I wonder who's on drugs!

notachance said...

Link from UM
http://tinyurl.com/23xtwl

That was actually a great read and I agreed with the author. Even down under they don't care for her movies as much anymore. Let's see if Hugh Jackman can pull Australia out of the dumper for her....

Sonora_Melody said...

realitycheck - I absolutely agree with you that "Critics forget that film is not an actors medium. At best its a directors/editors medium and at worst it a studios medium."

In an interview printed today in the San Francisco Chronicle, Naomi Watts had this to say when asked about working with director Michael Haneka in her film Funny Games:
"As an actor, you want to try things and discover moments. At the same time, I respect his purpose. Ultimately, film is a director's medium, and I'm here to help illustrate a director's ideas. ... "

Yes, Naomi, ultimately film is a director's medium!

NotBuyingItInNashville said...

Nicole Kidman only has control over her performance and in a sense that is limited to on the day of filming. The director chooses which takes to use. The editor can edit a film into something completely different than what the actors anticipated. The studio can force changes that are detrimental. The director may have made creative decisions that were mistakes...


This has got to be the funniest and most delusional thing ever written by a "Bunny."

SO every single movie that Nicold Kidless has done that has flopped (and there are what...more than 10?) was someone else's fault.

No wonder you believe everything her PR people tell you.

realitycheck said...

notbuyingit, you obviously know nothing about acting on film or your disdain for NK is clouding your judgment. Ask any serious actor and they will tell you the only true medium for an actor is the theatre. Every other medium is controlled by someone else...for good or bad.

And no, i dont listen to PR for that info. I have a degree in theatre and have taken classes in both stage and film acting.

But those of you that dont have an acting background can just watch several episodes of The Actor's Studio or directors commetaries on dvds and get the same info i just stated in my previous post.

It is the reality of filmmaking.

Call me what you want but i am no mindless follower of anyone.

inittowinit said...

Sonora said...
Have you forgotten the director can simply yell CUT and reshoot the scenes over (and over) until he's satisfied with the scene? Have you also forgotten the film editor and director can edit her scenes out?
-----------------------------------
No, I know this. And I'd love to see just how often that director says "Cut" before he gives up with her and has to take what he can get. And as for editing, I'm sure he has his job cut out for him as well!

As for Tom, I beg to differ, but by "power", I wasn't necessarily referring to acting. lol

getaholdofurself said...

hubby will get a chuckle when i tell him lifting his shirt to adjust his heart rate monitor during runs is pornographic.

you guys are hilarious!

doublewide said...

well, i wouldn't call the big belly photo op porn.

but some of her movies IMO are pretty close to soft porn. but anyway, the main point is she is just a talentless actress. porn or no porn....

getaholdofurself said...

i agree, dw, it wasn't porn. comparing it to pictures of a pantiless britney is absurd and one of the reasons it's difficult to take some of the skeptics seriously.

i believe nk is a good actress who's made more than a few dreadful role choices, but that's just me.

Imahick said...

I don't think NK is a terrible actress. I do think she makes terrible decisions about the roles she takes. She has said that she doesn't always read the script and often chooses roles based on the director...rather than the script. If that's the case, she needs to make a change in that process.

Whether the last few years of flops are because of her acting or because of her poor choice in projects, the result is the same. She is getting a reputation as box office poison. She may have success in Europe and down under, but in the US she isn't very popular.

If I was her, I'd take a break and try to re-group. But I'm sure the minute junior emerges from her loins, she'll be anxious to get back onto a movie set. I get the impression that real life doesn't suit Ms Kidman. Me thinks she is much more comfortable playing someone else than being NK.

Hopefully Keith is on his hormones, so he can play wet nurse when the baby arrives. Otherwise, I fear this child will not have much of a parental influence ... cause I don't see NK putting in too many sleepless nights. I think she is excited about the idea of being pregnant and having a baby. Once the infant arrives, I suspect she might find the whole experience a bit tedious. No doubt she'll have an army of Nannies to love and care for her little princess. (Yes, I think it's a girl)

getaholdofurself said...

Imahick said...
"Me thinks she is much more comfortable playing someone else than being NK."

i don't think you're completely off base here. some see a woman who's cold and aloof. i see a woman who's insecure.

keith has been vocal about his own insecurities off stage. i think some are just better at masking them than others.